this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
181 points (98.4% liked)

News

36867 readers
2454 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

As a consequence, lower income earners will not replace their tires when they should, leading to more road accidents.

I'm not a California native, but a quick google search shows that California already has vehicle inspection requirements and if they fail, they are not legal to drive on California roads. Tire wear check could be added as one of those things check and fail it, if tires are in need of replacement.

[–] MoreFPSmorebetter@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that many many people are driving around on tires that are way below minimum acceptable tread wear here in California. Some of them just don't understand. Some are incompetent. Some are poor.

When I recently got all 4 of my tires replaced I watched the tire techs warn several customers that the tread on their tires was too low and every single one of them said they couldn't afford new tires right now so rotate them and let them leave.

A tire tax would likely just increase the number of people trying to stretch a tire way past it's recommended minimum tread depth for safety in order to save money. This would have a negative effect on road safety in the long run.

Not to mention it would also just incentivise people to put on the hardest and longest lasting rubber they can find meaning that in cold or wet conditions they will have significantly worse performance again leading to more accidents.

The tire tax idea seems like a very bad idea.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Some are poor.

When I recently got all 4 of my tires replaced I watched the tire techs warn several customers that the tread on their tires was too low and every single one of them said they couldn’t afford new tires right now so rotate them and let them leave.

It's not just hitting the poor. Like, if it were, you'd only see the poor living paycheck-to-paycheck. But...that's not actually the situation. The bulk of it is going to be financial literacy, which at least when I went through school was not something covered at all. I think that financial literacy is seriously an area where the US doesn't do all that well.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/31/61percent-of-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck-even-as-inflation-cools.html

The survey found most Americans (58%) are living paycheck to paycheck. Struggling to make ends meet, many are relying on credit cards to cover any shortfalls. Meanwhile, nearly one-quarter of those surveyed said credit card debt also contributed to their financial stress.

Living paycheck to paycheck means consumers need their next paycheck to meet their monthly obligations. How much of a cash cushion they have is hugely important in determining how far consumers are willing to push their paychecks every month — and how stressed out they might be if faced with an unexpected financial shock.

It’s not about being “poor.” And alternatively, not living paycheck to paycheck isn’t about being “rich” — even though most people prefer to define it in those stark terms.

Instead, we find that paycheck-to-paycheck living spans all income levels, including half of high earners (defined as those earning $100,000 or more each year) as of January 2025. Across all income groups, people report similar abilities to pay their monthly bills without a struggle but needing the next paycheck to stay on track. This implies that living paycheck to paycheck isn’t solely about financial hardship or an inability to meet basic needs, but how people choose to manage their monthly income.

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only time my car has been inspected has been a rare repair or during smog tests, and many are exempt.

Actually, yeah, it was 120,000 mile service. New clutch, water pump, timing belt, and synchro ring. Pretty much the only inspection. Hmmm, timing belt is coming up again...

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only time my car has been inspected has been a rare repair or during smog tests, and many are exempt.

So the process and infrastructure for automobile checks is already in place. The only changes needed would be to remove the exemptions, and potentially increase the frequency. Many states have annual inspections already.

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I should clarify, it was a free inspection, courtesy of the shop, with the car in for a repair I scheduled, not at the request of government.

We so have "star stations" where some vehicles can be selected for more elaborate smog-related inspections, but that can be a crapshoot.

I've had one car pass only if we installed leaky OEM exhaust pipes on, and another fail because it did not have a CARB decal on the catalytic converter. (Fun fact, the cat we were forced to buy and install didn't have a decal either, but it "passed" after. Yeah, it was a shakedown)